Runna Vs. Vth Additional District Judge/Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal

Runna vs Vth Additional District Judge/Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal

Disposition Petition allowed Court Allahabad Decided Aug 29, 1996

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/484955

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/484955
Court: Allahabad High Court
Judge: M. Katju, J.
Decided On: Aug 29, 1996
Case Number: C.M.W.P. No. 27782 of 1996
Subject: Motor Vehicles
Disposition: Petition allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Key legal issue: Motor Vehicles
Outcome / disposition: Petition allowed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Runna

Advocate Piyush Mishra, Adv.

Respondent

Vth Additional District Judge/Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal

Advocate Standing Counsel

Legal References

Reported In: 1999ACJ637

Excerpt

- m. katju, j.1. heard learned counsel for the parties.2. the petitioner's husband died in a motor accident and she was awarded a sum of rs. 75,000 by the lok adalat and the amount has been deposited by the insurance company in court. by the impugned order dated 16.5.1996 it has been directed that only rs. 10,000 be paid to the petitioner out of the aforesaid amount of rs. 75,000 and the balance be deposited in some nationalised bank for a long term. i cannot understand how such order could be passed by the trial court. there is no dispute that the petitioner is a major and hence it is for her to decide what to do with the money which has been awarded. hence i set aside the order dated 16.5.1996 and direct that the sum of rs. 75,000 and any interest which may have accrued thereon be paid to the petitioner forthwith.3. petition is allowed. no order as to costs.

Full Judgment

M. Katju, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner's husband died in a motor accident and she was awarded a sum of Rs. 75,000 by the Lok Adalat and the amount has been deposited by the insurance company in court. By the impugned order dated 16.5.1996 it has been directed that only Rs. 10,000 be paid to the petitioner out of the aforesaid amount of Rs. 75,000 and the balance be deposited in some nationalised bank for a long term. I cannot understand how such order could be passed by the trial court. There is no dispute that the petitioner is a major and hence it is for her to decide what to do with the money which has been awarded. Hence I set aside the order dated 16.5.1996 and direct that the sum of Rs. 75,000 and any interest which may have accrued thereon be paid to the petitioner forthwith.

3. Petition is allowed. No order as to costs.

Same Court & Year Allahabad · 1996 Same Parties Runna vs Vth Additional District Judge/Motor Accidents Claims... Same Subject Motor Vehicles Same Judge M. Katju, J.

Motor Vehicles